If it's a good paper (as opposed to shallow BS about punctuation or meter), horribly right. With the broad view that Dr. Cleve alludes to, that's the kind of student who might produce new insights about old texs.

Yeah. . . I'm kinda with Moria in this case. I've had students write very good, very close readings before--essays that make really compelling arguments based largely on detailed poetic analysis. I'm proud of those papers and the skills they display (especially since I teach scansion & poetic analysis, at least briefly, in every damn class).

But while in theory this paper could be one of those, it's from a lower-division course, with a lot of non-majors, and my first instinct, upon seeing its title (I haven't read it yet, nor do I even remember which student wrote it) was to be afraid.